My first week with my rMBP, and my thoughts on the purchase

I probably have a pretty good idea of what you'll say, but I want to ask anyway. What screens are you referring to?

 

Lots of delusional people here. Last year's MBP had a color gamut of 70% NTSC, this one has 67%. Therefore worse and it never was all that great.
Professionals do shoot in and use Adobe RGB color space. A decent HD TV has a higher color gamut than sRGB. You can't even see 1/2 the colors with sRGB gamut, it's like working while pepper spraying yourself in the eyes.

What good is all that resolution on a 15" screen? Hawks and eagles are birds and don't need laptops, humans on the other hand will use 1440 x 900 because they can't see anything on a 15" screen at full retina resolution. The only good it does is so you can brag how it has more pixels. Spinal tap, all it is "this one goes to 11"

I'm not saying that a 7200RPM drive is faster than SSD, but I am saying that Photoshop on my laptop opens in 3 seconds, so your SSD is slow because it isn't any faster than my normal drive and it doesn't surprise me. Just like this so called retina display is a cheap low end IPS panel, so is probably the SSD they use and don't know how to properly set up. All they apparently know is how to inflate the price.

Find HP elite laptop with IPS dreamcolor display, compare that to your retina display and then try not to cry if you've actually paid over $2000 for MBP.

 

Agreed. To be fair though, the rMBP is quite an achievement in areas other than the screen. This is why I actually got one - the screen is nice, but what I really wanted was the full voltage CPU, 16GB memory, and good discrete video in a package under 5 lbs and less than 3/4" thick. The Sony SA was the only close contender, but since the prices ended up being the same, learning OSX alongside using Windows won out.

 

Of course it is. Like I said. If they sold this for $1200 then I would have no problem with it because that is how much it's worth in its basic configuration.
They just throw around a bunch of nonsense words like retina and add $1000 to the price.

Sony is also overpriced. Look at Clevo for better hardware at the right price and 95% gamut screens. Thinkpad W530 is good too, and of course HP with dreamcolor displays, but they are also being unreasonable with their pricing ( $5000+ if you max it out ).

 

What does a new HP EliteBook with the Dreamcolor display cost?

 

Sorry mate, but this is blatantly false. sRGB and R709 (HDTV color space) are almost identically matched. The only difference in newer HDTVs are post-processed colors that add to gamut by sacrificing accuracy, and most of these are only truly usable if the source material (DVD, BR, etc) is shot with those colors which, because HD video equipment also uses R709, never is. At least not yet.

This may be true of some users, but I personally have no trouble with 1080p on a 13" screen for coding and database work. This is one area where generalizations (all humans) don't apply.

 

Troll much? If you really believe half the drivel your spewing, then a conversation about it probably is useless.

 

There's always google. Everything I said is a fact. check it for yourself.

Too much, but at least it is the best you can buy

Wrong. My camera can shoot sRGB or Adobe RGB. In any case, photographers actually print their images, we aren't only talking about video, sRGB just isn't enough for serious pro work.

Don't blame the messenger. I'm not a troll here. You guys have been trolled by Apple.

 

Thats what I was going to tell you.. go check your "facts" ... and try to understand the difference in opinion and fact, and just because you really strongly believe in your opinion, it doesn't make it a fact even if you have it stuck as a "fact" in your brain no matter what. This is the same thing that happens in religious wars... people fight over "facts" that the others don't believe are facts

 

For my needs, I would say better. I can get 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 when I am programing depending on how much space I want and how big I want things, but I can also drop down to 1440 for native quality gaming.

As long as the program has been updated they all look very good to me. And that is coming from someone that can not stand running laptops in non native modes.

 

So what's not a fact? This year's MBP has color gamut of 67%, last year's had 70%.

Phortoshop opens in 3 seconds on my laptop, another fact.

HDTV does have higher gamut than sRGB and retina display doesn't even cover sRGB anyway ( even the guy above confirmed it while trying to show how it's not relevant ).

Most people will not use full resolution on a 15" MBP retina. You could call that an opinion, but if we polled everybody how many do you think would be using it? so you could say it is a fact.

Anything else?

 

Make a youtube video of your 7200 rpm hard drive booting, and opening photoshop in 23 seconds. That way I know its not in ram. Case closed..

 

I just clicked it and it opened before I could count to 2 seconds ( opened for the first time after a power up ). If you don't believe me too bad, I don't really care enough to start making videos about it.

 

At the risk of feeding this fire, you are right, your camera can shoot photos and videos in sRGB or adobeRGB. The point I was making was in reference to your HDTV comment. If you view adobeRGB images or videos on your HDTV, which uses the R709 colorspace, colors will look unsaturated and inaccurate because your encoding space doesn't match your work space. JVC is the only HDTV manufacturer who released a set that would show 96% adobeRGB and it flopped. There is currently no unit that does this. This is why there is no television studio that I know of who shoots any video in anything other than R709 at this time.

If you're a professional photographer who works in solely in a print environment or who only looks at photos on the calibrated screen in front of you, then adobeRGB is fine. Bringing this back to the rMBP, it isn't meant for that purpose.

 

Isn't that what I'm saying? MBP retina or no retina is not a pro machine and shouldn't sell for more than $1200 - $1500. That's all. It's basically a toy.

Going back to HDTV. Try watching the same Blu-ray movie on a really good HDTV and MBP side by side. I've done it. You'll be shocked at how pale and washed out MBP or any laptop with that kind of gamut will look. It looks OK when just watching it on a laptop, but put them side by side it becomes a W&%T$&%F moment.

 

How do you define professional? Professional for a small subset of photographers who want to work in adobe RGB only on an 8 bit monitor and worse for everyone else? If you don't understand the tradeoff between adobe RGB and sRGB, then you shouldn't worry about it.

If you do understand the tradeoff, then you would prefer a monitor set for sRGB than adobe RGB at 8 bits of color depth per channel.

If you understand the tradeoff and you still want an 8 bit adobe RGB monitor, then you should already know that you are an extreme minority even (especially?) among professional users.

Digital art at 8 bits of color per channel is simply going to be smoother if your environment is set up for sRGB. Unsurprisingly, everything done on a laptop is digital.

Adobe RGB is better geared for 10 bit monitors. Or just wait for 16 bits (48 bit color) and go for ProPhoto RGB or something similar.

 

The last time I configured the 15" Elitebook with the low end quad, 16GB RAM, and the Dreamcolor screen it was like 4 or 5K. Way out of my price range for a machine.

A lot of people point to that display as being the best on the market. I just hate HP machines. I wish other makers would offer nice displays but they just don't.

The one thing I will say about the "debate" that is occurring here is that hopefully it will drive the market to improve displays across the entire industry.

 

Agreed. The raft of companies releasing 768p displays is a testament to how accepting of horrible laptop screens the average consumer has become. I really hope the higher resolution on the rMBP and hopefully some success by Asus and Samsung in their ultrabook offerings with IPS displays will wake some folks up and push the curve upwards across the board.

 

Clevo and Lenovo Thinkpad w530 use AUO 95% matte screens which are pretty good. On Clevos they are an option, not stock.

 

I am pretty sure if you put a w520 in sRGB, it can only do about 85-89% and can be tricky to get calibrated. Also, the on board calibration is junk... And the lenovo boards say the w530 uses the same FHD screen.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/app...ts-pics-ifixit-56k-warning-5.html#post8611528


I know the notebookcheck review of the w520 checked it and out of the box it could not cover sRGB.


Also I have a question... Would a web firm that works in sRGB be less professional than a newspaper that prints cmyk? Does the former demand toys while the latter uses pro equipment?

 

Clearly. Also, digital artists, film makers, animators, 3d modellers, web designers, and everyone else who creates content where the entire pipeline is digital also only use toys. No pro equipment allowed. The only people who use pro equipment are photographers (but not film makers) who shoot in adobe RGB (mistake) or work in adobe RGB (not necessarily a mistake)

 

The 95% TN used in Lenovo and Clevo laptops is one of the best TN panels and covers AdobeRGB almost completely. rMBP is only about 70% Adobe RGB.

From their W520 review

 

What about the part that says:

The green-yellow section is in turn underrepresented and can't cover that part of sRGB. All in all, the color space covers a great deal but sometimes mismatches colors.

The number of colors is one thing, but it they are not the right ones that is another

 

That's why you calibrate the display to your liking. As a matter of fact I have that screen as well as a 100%sRGB panel (M18xR1) and with both calibrated, the RGB LED destroys the competition. But it depends on your personal preferences in the end. If you create web content and want it to look accurate on most displays, - 100% sRGB is what you need. But if it's for your eyes only - wide gamut simply makes the picture look far more real. I wish there were 48-bit (16 per primary color) 100% Wide RGB LED laptop panels, we would then have ~70% of the visible color spectrum covered. With what we have now, sRGB covers about 30-35%, while the ARGB - ~50-55%, IIRC.

 

in any case, the relevancy of this is small compared to the reaction happening on this forum.

 

Agreed. Alas, I was expecting more from Apple this time around and when my hopes were shattered, couldn't strop myself from over-reacting. The rMBP is a great machine and the screen is gorgeous, even though I hoped for a DreamColor2+ depth of color combined with a matte finish ....

 

what i would give for a high res matte screen on an apple laptop. my oh my.

 

I was willing to pay extra 100$ for matte finish and another 200-400 for RGBLED, oh well

 

I was waiting for chicken wings... anyone ordered that?

 

Usually, products evolve over time and not all at once. Only a set number of things can really change in one year..

If we look at what did change in the retina 2012 macbook pro, I am amazed...

Changing the storage type to solid state, increasing default ram amounts, improving speaker performance, decreasing chasis size and weight, increasing screen resolution, black levels and contrast ratios, and so forth would seem like a lot of change for any manufacturer, but it seems like apple can never do enough..

That is not even mentioning the redesigned cooling system, reduced glare, and very nice gpu... And this is on top of what a great many people see as one of the most advanced laptops in the world. (The 2011 model, which they did not even take away...)

It is almost like people expect miracles every year, and throw their toys and pout when the water does not turn to wine?

I think people expect the laptop to wirelessly submit colors to their brain and use air for batteries, while doing their work for them?

It reminds me of this clip.

 

No, no... I give manufacturers until 2014 to do those things.

Admittedly, in spite of all the back and forth in this and other threads, concerns with the gamut of the screen and updatability of components, and the overall price of the machine, I am very excited to receive my rMBP next week and immediately give it a kick in the pants.

 

ROFL. Me too!!!

On that note, I am now wondering if our machines aren't being held for the Mountain Lion launch.

 

thats too funny and so true... no matter how amazing something is the majority of people will do nothing but complain about the parts that just aren't good enough for them.

sometimes people get their machines (even shipped from the factory) just after an OS launch, thinking it'll have the new OS on it.. and it still doesn't just cuz you get it maybe a week after ML launch, you may still have to upgrade.

 

I know. I just crack up every time I watch that.

We should force all the whiners to play Pong and Missile Command for a month and take away their smartphones.

 

I agree to most of what you say. But the thing is, those incredible improvements that Apple undoubtedly did with the rMBP, wouldn't be possible if people weren't pushing forward, constantly aiming for the stars. There wouldn't be such a fierce competition and such huge steps forward with each refresh cycle if we were satisfied with what we had. We would probably still be using those phones hating the people with zero's and 9's in their phone numbers

BTW, Luis C.K. rox!

Here's the r MBP review by notebookcheck. I'm surprised by the relatively low score for the screen: 86%. I'd give it at least 90%+.

 

86% lol that's harsh. What is a 90%+ screen to them? Maybe when I get eye surgery I'll be able to enjoy one of these.

 

If I plan to try to game on the new Macbook Retina it was confirmed that the 2.6GHz and 2.3GHz model does not make a difference for this correct? It was posted that people were getting 60 fps playing Skyrim but none of them used mods or got into big fights. So I just want to know how far can this Macbook be pushed.

 

The youtube video I posted that had 60+ fps was with about 15 mods. There really are not that many massive fights in skyrim, so I haven't had the chance to see what that does, but I am expecting 50s.